Support NeoGAF

[Roni]

Felt it was fine. The Witcher 3's combat definitely took a step in the accessibility direction when compared to 2, but the system never got so responsive and precise anyone could game the system and become untouchable.

For my money, that's in line with the game's design. If the combat was extremely responsive and precise players would lose tension as they played. The current system is unpredictable enough that players can be easily hit is they disrespect their enemies, but not punishing enough they'd die from a single blow.

 

[Zaki2407]

I made the mistake of playing Bloodborne before W3.

This.

 

[Lanf]

Agree with most of what has been said here: it's sluggish, not very tight and monotone. Enemy AI is pretty stupid and they never deviate from their attack patterns. This also persists no matter the difficulty. Geralt becomes a bit of a glass cannon and the enemies just gain more health. You don't have to change or even think much about your combat strategy, just dodge and attack.


Might sound like a rant, but I don't actually care that much. Game is brilliant and the combat is serviceable. Could be worse, could be an Elder Scrolls game.

 

[Bedlam]

It was no Dark Souls/Bloodborne then again but it didn't want to be that. I felt W3's combat was fine for what it wanted to achieve (especially on higher difficulties when you had to play a bit more strategic instead of button-mashing through everything).

However, the only one big gripe I have are the shitty hitboxes sometimes, especially with larger enemies. Sometimes the hitboxes didn't match the animations at all which was jarring and caused several undeserved deaths for me.

 

[valkyre]

I love W3 but its combat leaves a lot to be desired. The way Geralt moves especially in unenven terrain is just irritating as hell.

 

[Projectjustice]

People wants everything equal to Souls Series, when they finally get it, they will complain that every game is exactly like Souls.

Welcome to the internetz

Yup, I love the combat. I'm glad it's not trying to be another game. I feel like I'm in control when I'm playing. I dont understand how you aren't. When you are fighting 20 bad guys at the same time. Being in control is the only way you are going to win. I played on death march too.

 

[Unai]

People always talk about Dragon's Dogma or Dark Souls, but I think it's also worth to mention Kingdoms of Amalur as an example of a western open world RPG with really good combat.

 

[Already Torn]

Yup, I love the combat. I'm glad it's not trying to be another game. I feel like I'm in control when I'm playing. I dont understand how you aren't. When you are fighting 20 bad guys at the same time. Being in control is the only way you are going to win. I played on death march too.

Did you play once they patched in better movement?

Even once it controlled a little better it's still inherently unsatisfying I think. No oomph to your attacks.

 

[Ysiadmihi]

Geralt is overpowered. Even on the hardest difficulty, certain spells can trivialize 99% of the combat encounters.

 

[toddhunter]

I had a really great reply to post, one that I spent a lot of time on and brought up a lot of great points.

Unfortunately that reply was for a slightly different topic so I have to go with something basic instead.

 

[Koroseki]

It feels to slow and unresponsive.
I think combat like KOA:Reckoning would suit it a lot more.

 

[LegendX48]

I love it. Meanwhile I hate Souls combat. I must have my wires crossed!

I'm kinda in the same boat here as well. Souls combat is incredibly dull, I have no idea why people love it so much.

 

[Enduin]

I don't mind it too much, but it's not great.

Geralt controls like a drunk boulder and in combat he handles like a drunk, shuffling, boulder that occasionally rolls around.

 

[Aiustis]

I didn't think it was terrible, but I do agree with the word serviceable. I like good combat so serviceable is not good enough for me.

I don't get the complaining though; I wouldn't expect a game like the Witcher to have anything more than serviceable combat.

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

Yup, I love the combat. I'm glad it's not trying to be another game. I feel like I'm in control when I'm playing. I dont understand how you aren't. When you are fighting 20 bad guys at the same time. Being in control is the only way you are going to win. I played on death march too.

no you win by doing the same rotation ad infinitum until everyone is dead because the AI is dumb and the enemies have zero movement variability.

 

[Projectjustice]

Did you play once they patched in better movement?

Even once it controlled a little better it's still inherently unsatisfying I think. No oomph to your attacks.

Yea there isnt much oomph to attacks but Geralt uses swords. Slicing doesn't give much oomph but that's why he has finishing moves. Yes I ayes it with both movement versions.

no you win by doing the same rotation ad infinitum until everyone is dead because the AI is dumb and the enemies have zero movement variability.

Yes you can but why play that way? You have tons of options. Get creative, Geralt is OP as hell especially with the mutations from blood and wine.

I'm replaying the game in NG+. There are some mobs that you don't even damage in it. This should of been the base game. Death March in NG+ is amazingly hard. One hit kills all over.

 

[Drinkel]

I haven't played that far into it but my main problem so far is that attack inputs feel unreliable. I don't know if a slash is going to cause Geralt to leap toward an exposed enemy, slash the air in front of him whiled taking a step toward some enemy or even slash toward a closer enemy behind his back. Not knowing exactly where Geralt is going to end up causes me to want to avoid these risky behaviors since they could easily end up in my death if he lunges into a group of enemies. This causes me to rely on dodging and using signs since they are at least reliable input wise, but makes the combat overall way more tedious because it's more about managing the outcomes of Geralts inputs than the behavior of the monsters themselves. Part of it is also that some of the sign spamming is way too effective making a lot of the combat uninteresting.

 

[Magic Mushroom]

I'm kinda in the same boat here as well. Souls combat is incredibly dull, I have no idea why people love it so much.

It's tight, precise, weighty, versatile and challenging.

So good, it was major inspiration for the Witcher 3, accept they couldn't even come close.

http://www.express.co.uk/entertainm...-Souls-big-influence-CD-Projekt-RED-Wild-Hunt

Reacting to one tweet, Monnier revealed his regard for the Dark Souls combat system and why it had become a big influence for the Wild Hunt.

'What do you, as a game designer, think of the Dark Souls combat system? Would it work with the Witcher?'

He wrote: "I love it, ours is similar in fact. Responsive, fast. Big influence for sure."

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

Yes you can but why play that way? You have tons of options. Get creative, Geralt is OP as hell especially with the mutations from blood and wine.

I'm replaying the game in NG+. There are some mobs that you don't even damage in it. This should of been the base game. Death March in NG+ is amazingly hard. One hit kills all over.

I haven't played any DLC yet so I'm talking base game strictly.

Because even if you do get creative the game doesn't challenge you in a similar fashion. One hit kills aren't the answer being even bigger damage sponges isn't either. There's no real variety in encounters they all play out the same.

 

[Sephzilla]

I played the Souls games first, so Witcher 3's gameplay was already a step down

 

[Projectjustice]

I haven't played any DLC yet so I'm talking base game strictly.

Because even if you do get creative the game doesn't challenge you in a similar fashion. One hit kills aren't the answer being even bigger damage sponges isn't either. There's no real variety in encounters they all play out the same.

There some really creative boss encounters in the expansions. I'm not saying the combat doesn't have its issues. I just don't believe it's as bad as some make it out to be. I like that it's different and it isn't trying to be like other games. So it's not just one hit kills.

 

[Mesoian]

I have no idea. I think it's great. It's not Dark Souls, but it's not trying to be.

I can't think of a single other open world game that does combat as well as The Witcher 3.

Dragons dogma

 

[J 0 E]

It's not Platinum-good but it's WAY better than any other WRPG

I enjoy it.

 

[Ratrat]

People wants everything equal to Souls Series, when they finally get it, they will complain that every game is exactly like Souls.

Welcome to the internetz

Load of shit.
Look at the difference in response to Nioh versus Lords of the Fallen. Bloodborne and Nioh actually take the combat in new directions on top of beeing good. Literally no one wants CdProjekt to lift Souls/DragonsDogma combat completely. They've been claiming to be inspired by From Software for years, maybe by their next game it will finally show.

It's not Platinum-good but it's WAY better than any other WRPG

I enjoy it.

Kingdoms of Amalur felt way better to play.

 

[Royal_Phalanx]

Too many damage sponges and attacks don't feel like they have real impact. Dark Souls has the best melee combat.

 

[chechi]

I made the mistake of playing Bloodborne before W3.

Yep.

 

[Markoman]

It sucks, because it's cheap as f..k.
Quen alone breaks the game.
It's bascially a rhythm game more than any other 3rd person action game.
Yeah, Souls games work like that to a certain degree, too, but the "don't be greedy, two hits max and evade"-rule alone won't get you through those games. In W3 I was able to beat some of the slow giant overleveled enemies with a basic hit-hit-backstep pattern. It took a while and looked ridiculous and cheap.
Only enemies in W3 that gave me troubles on highest difficulty were those annoying Wraths, especially that side-quest one that could one-hit you.

W3's combat took the worst out of modern combat games: Batman tethering, AC counters,
Souls dodge spam. No discussion. You like it? Good for you...

 

[LegendX48]

It's tight, precise, weighty, versatile and challenging.

So good, it was major inspiration for the Witcher 3, accept they couldn't even come close.

http://www.express.co.uk/entertainm...-Souls-big-influence-CD-Projekt-RED-Wild-Hunt

Interesting. Beyond that though, I disagree with Souls combat being any of the above >.> but I'll just leave it at that, don't mean to cause a ruckus.

 

[Already Torn]

Yea there isnt much oomph to attacks but Geralt uses swords. Slicing doesn't give much oomph but that's why he has finishing moves. Yes I ayes it with both movement versions.

Yes you can but why play that way? You have tons of options. Get creative, Geralt is OP as hell especially with the mutations from blood and wine.

I'm replaying the game in NG+. There are some mobs that you don't even damage in it. This should of been the base game. Death March in NG+ is amazingly hard. One hit kills all over.

Using swords isn't much of an excuse when all of the games people are negatively comparing The Witcher 3 to also have swords. I'd say even Zelda does sword combat better (barring Skyward Sword of course). Sticking a giant piece of steel into somebody should feel like it hurts.

 

[Deleted member 752119]

I didn't mind it at all personally. But I don't really care about combat in RPGs, I'm there for the story, characters, exploration and questing and often just drop difficulty to power through the combat anyway--though I played most of W3 on normal at least and just dropped it down for some spots I died a few times and then put it back up.

 

[Inorganic]

I finished W3 recently and thought the combat was completely serviceable but not terrible by any means. It did feel very sluggish and clunky at times, but playing on Death March difficulty helped. My biggest issue was the broken lock on system. Half the time it would not work. I also wish there was some stealth mechanics, like sneaking behind enemies for attacks. Overall, I still enjoyed the game enough to get a platinum.

 

[Ellite25]

I made the mistake of playing Bloodborne before W3.

Exactly this. The Witcher 3 seemed terrible as a result. It's a shame, of the game had fun combat I would probably love it. But the fact that it's clunky and imprecise ruins the game for me.

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

There some really creative boss encounters in the expansions. I'm not saying the combat doesn't have its issues. I just don't believe it's as bad as some make it out to be. I like that it's different and it isn't trying to be like other games. So it's not just one hit kills.

That's what I heard but the expansions while substantial are both a further investment and far from the meat of the game. You can't just ignore them since there's a complete edition either though.

 

[Lux R7]

People always talk about Dragon's Dogma or Dark Souls, but I think it's also worth to mention Kingdoms of Amalur as an example of a western open world RPG with really good combat.

it's better than tw3 but not nearly as good as the other two imho.

 

[Unai]

it's better than tw3 but not nearly as good as the other two imho.

I agree, but it's better than almost everything else, TW3 included.

 

[conman]

A fantastic combat system marred by floaty motion animations and muddy response times. But you get used to it.

Compared to similar combat mechanics like in Bloodborne, the Witcher 3 doesn't have the same overall crispness in its response. Motions and actions aren't as sharp or immediate. It works fine and you do get used to the funky timing, but it isn't the game's best attribute. It's an absolutely stellar game, but it does have shortcomings.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

I have no idea. I think it's great. It's not Dark Souls, but it's not trying to be.

I can't think of a single other open world game that does combat as well as The Witcher 3.

Dragon's Dogma
Kingdoms of Amalur

People wants everything equal to Souls Series, when they finally get it, they will complain that every game is exactly like Souls.

Welcome to the internetz

What a stupid post. People use Souls as an example of good combat as a general statement, but almost no one is saying "W3 combat should be like Souls". It's just a stupid strawman.

Dragons Dogma, Monster Hunter, Souls, Nioh, etc... share a lot of the same DNA though

What? No. Nioh and Souls, okay. But Dragon's Dogma and MH is already an iffy comparison, though they have "some DNA" I guess, both of which are very different than Souls. Unless by sharing DNA you just mean "stamina management", "precise hitboxes" and "weighty attacks" or something... which should really just be the bare minimums of good combat...

 

[sappyday]

I don't think the combat is terrible and it is a lot more fun on a harder difficulty during a alchemy build, but there are still issues. There are two types of enemies that were really annoying to fight in TW3: Human and Insects. Humans would do insane amounts of damage but it took forever to break their guard and then kill them. Insects would repeatedly do the same stun that can be really annoying.

 

[Yautja_Warrior]

Witcher 3's combat might not be perfect but I feel some people overreact when saying the combat is terrible. Its fine, especially when you start to unlock more combat skills.

Playing on PC at 60fps+ helps too I guess, compared to 30fps on my old PC, much more responsive.